ASPO's Plan for Population Reduction

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

reply wintler

Postby jowettknowit » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:09 am

<!--EZCODE FONT START--><span style="color:black;font-family:courier;font-size:medium;">you ask: on what grounds do i hold that population is not too large - i gave those grounds - did you take those in, or assume it was infotainment talk? - <br><br>on what grounds do you hold that 6 billion is too much? - you bring no facts - youve heard countlessly repeated stories of scarcity, resources running out, but im telling you that there is at least one book [that didnt appear to me to be biassed or partisan] that points out that environmental science has been politicised for so long, unpopular scientific data get marginalised - environmental issues are votecatchers, so politicians harp and harp on stuff that is not quite as much knowledge as they would have you think - i didnt get my data from infotainment - i got it from universities - im not of course saying it cant be wrong - im saying environmental bandwagons can be wrong - i gave some facts - <br><br>there are people who are proud to join a bandwagon - they feel terribly progressive and thinking - but bandwagons are not thinking or selfinforming - they are comfort stops for the easily mentally exhausted<br><br>the decline of resources is not because of scarcity but because of wasteful use - eg, american farms 1/30th the agric. efficiency of china and sudan - small farms 16 times more productive than the big farms the corporations create - the overprofit-driven corps have a reason to create scarcity - scare-city - scar-city - therefore you must check out whether it is nature's limits or artificial limits that are responsible for the scarcity we have today - you know that farmers are paid not to produce - i pointed to the actual very low density of humans on this planet - you refute or attack none of these points - is that honest?<br><br>desalination can be done simply with a pipe from the sea to a plastic zigzag roofed shallow pool, and collecting the condensation, which is particularly great in deserts, with extreme daynight temperature differentials - <br><br>ocean fish farms could be along every coast - freshwater fishfarms along every river - and there will be, when we get the numbers to do the work - if extinction doesnt get us first, which it will if we dont get it that we have pinstripe madmen in governing positions<br><br>we will never reach overpopulation, we will reach max population - sometime before 2800AD, when there will be 100 people per sq ft - <br><br>floating cities are not impossible - cities designed to be immune to swell movement simply by having the float chambers below and the city above the swell zone, and narrow supports in the swell zone<br><br>there is a lot we could do if we werent paralysed by the usurpers, instead of thinking, sane, mature people,<br>occupying the governing positions -<br>permaculture techniques can do a lot for desert and semidesert conditions - if governance is free from endless political infighting<br><br>bushes have sprung up along fencelines in australian outback just because of bird sitting on the fences and crapping - even without more water - a lot can be done in tropical areas where they have enough rain but not spread thru the year - it is only because the third world has been plundered to death [and still being squeezed of $200 billion a year, altho eg the economy of africa is smaller than the economy of italy] and are therefore driven by desperation to plunder one another endlessly -that they havent built a storage dam in every village<br><br>not at all irresponsible - but there is little practical effect separating your trash when the global corps are gungho for nonsustainable scarcity farming, and the world is accelerating to limitless levels of inequity/violence - <br><br>some of the environmental things are not realistic - ways that teachers can feel they are teaching something important, ways that children can feel they are doing all they can - but totally unrealistic in terms of essential results<br><br>which teacher is teaching the loss of world topsoil? - why is topsoil being lost? - savage profittaking in forestry - imagine how insane you have to be to take out trees in nepal of all places - causing millions of flooddeaths in bangladesh - you can be sure someone is making a killing and someone in govt is being soothed with bribes t shut up about the damage - that is why bandits are attracted to govt - because of the bribes<br><br>you know per capita food production has increased over the last 50 years - so where are your signs of depletion?<br><br>buckminster fuller has said that we are approaching the point where our metal needs will be met by recycled metal<br><br>in a nonhysterical world, oil would simply run out and people would adapt without fuss - we could all go back to the country if necessary and fend for ourselves on our 5 acres with little need for transport - <br><br>you know the oilboys are manufacturing shortages to keep people scared and submissive to whatever they are told - 'oh its a crisis, we have to trust the oilboys and take any medicine they give us'<br><br>what are you arguing for? - if you had facts you would bring them forward and we would learn, but you dont bring facts</span><!--EZCODE FONT END--> <p></p><i></i>
jowettknowit
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

..

Postby wintler » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:47 am

Dreams end: believe what you like, you obviously do anyway.<br><br>-<br><br>i wrote: So many unfounded claims and allegations, where to start. Why bother, i also ask myself <br><br>somebody replied: That is a good question! Why DO you bother?<br><br>Because i'm sick of smears and anthropocentrism, & thought the standard of debate on RI was sufficient to keep everyone to the facts. <br><br>But i see that some are happier dreaming up nebulous global intergenerational conspiracies than facing the reality of limits. <br>Don't get me wrong, conspiracies exist, but i like more evidence than allegations of motive in mine.<br><br>On what grounds do i think that 6.5+ billion is 'too many'? On the grounds that water tables are dropping at >1'/yr in California, Rajastan, Iran, China, W.Australia, that cod fisheries after collapsing in n.atlantic in early 1990's still haven't even nearly recovered, that the mean surface temp of planet has already risen ~.6degrees, the arctic has thawed, that my continent (Aus.) has been >90% deforested in the agricultural zones and resulting soil salinity and erosion are expanding rapidly despite billions spent on remediation..<br><br>Wheres evidence that 6.5+ billion ISN'T too many?<br><br>(p.s. am well aware of crucial lifestyle/consumption aspect of population resources debate, thats why i've never owned a car, will never fly in a plane again, will have no more children). <p></p><i></i>
wintler
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:28 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

peak oil into the mainstream

Postby prophetlady » Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:00 am

I am attending an "energy conference" on Sept. 26 at Frederick Community College in Maryland. Congressman Roscoe Bartlett is the sponsor, and I will get to hear firsthand from Ken Deffeyes, Matt Simmons and Richard Heinberg. I am anxious to hear what these gentlemen have to say, after reading their works for the past year and a half. The first half of the conference deals with Peak Oil--Facts, Implications and Challenges and the second half deals with Sustainability--What Must We Do To Achieve a Soft Landing. I will be happy to post what it said here, to the best of my ability. <p></p><i></i>
prophetlady
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 10:03 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: the elite are going to get a shock if they

Postby Dreams End » Tue Sep 20, 2005 11:06 am

Thanks, prophetlady. The link to the report at the start of this thread is working again. It might be interesting to take a copy and see if you can get a comment, but the conference may not be set up that way.<br><br>You could, if you like, start a new thread with the scientific side of what they present...but I'm simply not expert enough to weigh those arguments. Here in this thread, I'm interested in how large a segment of the peak oilers are pushing population reduction and imminent catastrophe. Population reduction, for obvious reasons...and "imminent catastrophe" because this tells us there is no time to act and no hope of preventing it. This is a dangerous idea, in my view.<br><br>As for wintler, despite his self-important condescension, really didn't do much in the way of offering any evidence about scarcity of any kind. But thanks for letting me believe what I want. Your permission makes all the difference. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

can't see good sense in either extreme

Postby AnnaLivia » Tue Sep 20, 2005 3:06 pm

Yes, prophetlady, do hope you can report back to us about your experience at the conference. Sure WOULD be curious to see responses to you questioning them on die-off “provocateurs”. (but changes nothing for me, ultimately, as it doesn’t change the geologic facts….which I think prove the finite-ness of fossil fuels but not at all that “die-off is coming without fail”.)<br><br>Wintler, jowettknowit gave you my major reasons for not believing 6+ billion is too many people. (and the trend is always “better education, better quality of life = decreasing family sizes”.) Again, we’re talking distribution problems, not scarcity. Mis-distribution of food and of land and of populace…all traceable to people being deprived of their rightful earnings…which means deprived of their opportunities. And we are ignoring a myriad of alternate choices at present. Deserts ARE being re-modified by permaculturists, through means more akin to common sense than to rocket science. And, crickey, you ought to be able to see the amount of water needlessly wasted right there in Oz on growing cotton in the damdest places making irrigation essential. For what? Trying to meet the world shortage of cotton at all costs?? hah. And I’d think you’d be aware of the promise in stonedust to rejuvenate soils, increase food production, and even absorb carbon from the atmosphere. Some of the best research on that is from Oz (and Scotland). It even uses up tailings they don’t know where to put.<br><br>There is tremendous room for tremendous conservation and innovation in our cultures. You don’t have to go back to the stone age to re-direct the greywater from washing hands to be used to flush the toilet.<br><br>Incidentally, I’ll bet Americans would be surprised to hear about a step NZ took during water shortages. An official campaign on the theme of “if it’s yellow, let it mellow, if it’s brown, flush it down”. Kiwi’s are about the most practical, resourceful, capable people I’ve met. What’s that joke…about giving a kiwi bloke a hank of baling wire and sending him out to his shed, and in fifteen minutes he’ll build you an airplane? There’s still plenty of that spirit (more latent) in Americans, too, I believe. How can we measure that kind of resource? I always wonder how many einsteins and mozarts we starved to death in the “third world” before they were 5.<br><br>Getting’ back to the horses, I’m one who thinks we’ll maybe never actually run out of all oil. We’ll be pumping oil a hundred years from now, I’m sure. But not in the quantities that would allow us to stay based on King CONG (coal, oil, nat gas). As if we could anyway, what with the fact we need clean air to breathe. <br><br>The school of hard knocks teaches one to “use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without”. “a penny saved is a penny earned”. Dickwad cheney is personally responsible for me having known (and I do not forget this, Dickwad…….) what it’s like to wonder where the next meal for my kids is coming from. And will it be rice again, or macaroni again tonight? And even at that, realizing there are millions if not billions who would trade places with you in a heartbeat! You look ahead and want to save every resource you can…just in case.<br><br>I’m sure that’s why I take the very long view that someday, due to a geological truth you just can’t argue with, things are going to be very different for future persons. Whether it’s going to be better or worse is up to us who are consuming cheap energy now, and I sure as shootin’ think we’re arrogant and cruel as all get out, if we don’t begin to attack the problem right this minute. it takes time to educate those entering the physical sciences, it takes time just to convince more young-uns to go that route. I keep saying it: we have time and there are solutions, but we don’t have time to squander. Dammit, the stakes are just too high to gamble. Where could the harm possibly be in having started to prepare too SOON??? did we learn nothing from katrina for goshsakes?<br><br>It ain’t good propaganda unless that kernal of truth is in there to manipulate, right? Oil shortages past were politically motivated, to be sure. The one coming is dictated by geology. Just my opinion? Have you any idea how I’d love to be wrong?<br><br>And lastly, dreamsend, you are right that some peak-oilers are convinced of die-off and doom. But by now you have to know that I slap them upside the head every time they need it and I’m available.<br><br>Did ANYONE watch that video I posted of Richard Smalley’s take on all this? Anyone??<br><br>Thought not. Since everything I want known about peak oil is in that sane-voiced video, I’ll now quit my own yakking on this issue, here at RI, anyway. (no applause, please… just throw money.)<br> <p></p><i></i>
AnnaLivia
 
Posts: 747
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: can't see good sense in either extreme

Postby Dreams End » Tue Sep 20, 2005 3:50 pm

ALP, you are one of the biggest optimists on this board. No one would ever accuse you of "doom and gloom" thinking. Keep it up... <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Hey Dreamsend

Postby proldic » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:36 pm

Did you get to see this?<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=1000.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...1000.topic</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Yeah, Ruppert the underground renegade fighting the establishment -- linked on Google News pg 1, making keynote speeches at the Commonwealth Club...<br><br>Next year he's scheduled to give a speech at Bohemian Grove, right after the Grateful Dead set. <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START ;) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>
proldic
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hey Dreamsend

Postby dbeach » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:39 pm

heard stevie guitar miller jammed at the BOHO GRO this yr<br><br>'living in the USA.." <p></p><i></i>
dbeach
 
Posts: 2650
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 7:40 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: can't see good sense in either extreme

Postby AnnaLivia » Tue Sep 20, 2005 5:13 pm

Thanks, DreamsEnd. I come by that “optimism” honestly. I earned it the hard way (with loving help after the dopiest of all dopey mistakes) and learned that reality absolutely means leaving room for change to happen. I am actually a reformed pessimist, former visitor to the depths of despair (who never accepted that being medicated was the answer for me so I never was) (I woke up and realized I am not entitled to my despair), and I am fully un-denying of the troubles we face.<br><br>Just that I’ve become sure of the root of threat and the way to proceed, and quite eager…not just willing…to look those troubles right in the eye and take them on with all the power I know is in good-sense, determination, and attitude….and love for ourselves and each other. God, I’m the luckiest and most grateful woman alive, to have got a second chance and wound up with strength to spare and share. I try hard to at least make new mistakes, and not repeat the old ones, grin. I know I help tickle the martians’ funny bones often enough.<br><br>Like Cassandra (i think) reminded us again in blog comments recently, you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take. I’m not willing to lay down and die for what’s right (who said “heck no, what if I’m wrong”?), but I am willing to stand and fight for it come what may. I’ll take my soul intact into whatever is ahead, thanks.<br><br>It’s only on the outside that I’m teeny. Inside, the infinite has a home. Improbable does not mean impossible. It means “better get to work”. I am willing to fly the plane with a smile on my face, instead of pushing the auto-pilot button. It’s about that simple, really. Nothing really changed until I chose differently, and then everything changed.<br><br>(and now i've really gotta shove a sock in it and go clean two bathrooms and freeze yet more peppers from that over-producing garden of mine!)<br> <p></p><i></i>
AnnaLivia
 
Posts: 747
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

optimism and carrying capacity

Postby wintller » Tue Sep 20, 2005 7:53 pm

Optimism is a net good, but only the profoundly ignorant or the religiously optimistic can pretend that humans haven't already compromised the carrying capacity of this planet:<br><br>From the Millenium Assessment, the largest global scientific study ever done :<br><br>"A landmark study released today reveals that approximately 60 percent of the ecosystem services that support life on Earth – such as fresh water, capture fisheries, air and water regulation, and the regulation of regional climate, natural hazards and pests – are being degraded or used unsustainably. Scientists warn that the harmful consequences of this degradation could grow significantly worse in the next 50 years. <br>“Any progress achieved in addressing the goals of poverty and hunger eradication, improved health, and environmental protection is unlikely to be sustained if most of the ecosystem services on which humanity relies continue to be degraded,” said the study.<br>...<br>Although evidence remains incomplete, there is enough for the experts to warn that the ongoing degradation of 15 of the 24 ecosystem services examined is increasing the likelihood of potentially abrupt changes that will seriously affect human well-being. This includes the emergence of new diseases, sudden changes in water quality, creation of “dead zones” along the coasts, the collapse of fisheries, and shifts in regional climate."<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.millenniumassessment.org//en/article.aspx?id=58">www.millenniumassessment....aspx?id=58</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Or if you prefer retro:<br><br>WORLD SCIENTISTS' WARNING TO HUMANITY (1992) - Union of Concerned Scientists<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/ucs/about/1992-world-scientists-warning-to-humanity.html">www.ucsusa.org/ucs/about/...anity.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>"Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. Human activities inflict harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment and on critical resources. If not checked, many of our current practices put at serious risk the future that we wish for human society and the plant and animal kingdoms, and may so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know. Fundamental changes are urgent if we are to avoid the collision our present course will bring about. <br>...<br>Pressures resulting from unrestrained population growth put demands on the natural world that can overwhelm any efforts to achieve a sustainable future. If we are to halt the destruction of our environment, we must accept limits to that growth. A World Bank estimate indicates that world population will not stabilize at less than 12.4 billion, while the United Nations concludes that the eventual total could reach 14 billion, a near tripling of today's 5.4 billion. But, even at this moment, one person in five lives in absolute poverty without enough to eat, and one in ten suffers serious malnutrition.<br><br>No more than one or a few decades remain before the chance to avert the threats we now confront will be lost and the prospects for humanity immeasurably diminished."<br><br>or theres...<br><br>Ecological Society of America - Resolution on Human Population (1994)<br>"...Achieving a sustainable balance between human demands and environmental support systems is the focus of a recent resolution passed by the Ecological Society of America (ESA) at its 79th Annual Meeting. In anticipation of the upcoming United Nations International Conference on Population and Development, ESA issued the following statement:<br>The human population of the Earth, currently at 5.6 billion, is increasing rapidly. Attempting to provide an ever increasing number of people with a reasonable standard of living is certain to fail and to result in degradation of the Earth's renewable and nonrenewable resources. Thus, improving the quality of human life while maintaining and improving environmental quality requires that major efforts be made to slow and eventually stop the growth of the human population and to achieve a sustainable balance between human demands and the capability of the environment to support these demands. ..."<br><br>--<br><br>Theres plenty more where that came from, just ask. I am well aware of the many saving actions that COULD be made (recycling water, remineralising soils, passive solar design etc etc), but the FACT is that they are NOT being applied on 1/1000th of the scale required to have reqd impact. <br><br>E.g. the Aus govt has spent ~$5bil in last 10 yrs directly on remediation of land degredation, and Aus still losing land. About 0.5mil Ha of trees were planted in that time, but clearing for agriculture destroyed about 7 times that area in half the time. <br><br>Status quo economics directly opposes sustainability, and anyone who can't face that fact is part of the problem, imho. <br><br>Unsurprisingly the optimists are usual found in the first world, where our wealth still insulates us from most of the consequences of our greed. <br><br>The 'pessimistic' activists i've met from less developed countries would describe many of you as apologists-in-training, as "optimism keeps you on the treadmill" (as a guy from Tuvalu told me once).<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
wintller
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 7:53 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Guess Wintler's never heard

Postby proldic » Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:00 pm

of the <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Columbo Accords</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->... <p></p><i></i>
proldic
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

dreams end lies again

Postby wintler » Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:26 pm

"Here in this thread, I'm interested in how large a segment of the peak oilers are pushing population reduction and imminent catastrophe. Population reduction, for obvious reasons...and "imminent catastrophe" because this tells us there is no time to act and no hope of preventing it. This is a dangerous idea, in my view."<br><br>DE posts 1 recycled essay by 1 nonmember of ASPO in 1 ASPO newsletter and then claims its "ASPO's plan.." and that "a large segment of the peak oilers are pushing population reduction " - bullshit, peakoil.com/energyresources/PostCarbonInstitute/PowerswitchUK/etc have been dismissing smears like that and outing agent provocateurs claiming that for years. <br><br>DE goes on to claim peak oilers think there is no time to act and no hope of preventing it - bullshit again, as the dozens of elists and discussion forums on oil depletion prove, as they've all got very active discussions on lobbying, political agenda's, household and personal adaptation, sustainabilty, alt.technologies, you name it. <br><br>ASPO has and continues to lobby governments around the world (see peakoil.net), raising awareness of oil and other resource limits is a prime focus of most 'peak oil' groups and organisations (see postcarbon institute, oilcast.org, energybulletin.net). But DE knows if he repeats the lies enough times, enough f***ing morons will believe it.<br><br>Bottom line: <br>Neither i nor anybody i've read have supported coercive or covert pop.reduction plans (not even Stanton!), yet DE keeps claiming peakoilers = nazi's and NWO elites planning a dieoff, to a chorus of me-tooers.<br><br>Goebbels would be smug, DE proves his dictum about repeating lies again.<br> <p></p><i></i>
wintler
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:28 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: dreams end lies again

Postby Dreams End » Tue Sep 20, 2005 9:09 pm

wintler, I'm putting you in time out.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

la-la land, otherwise known as the land of oz

Postby proldic » Tue Sep 20, 2005 9:13 pm

What planet are you living on?<br><br>Warning people!!! <br><br>Here <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>you're</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> the one trying to pass off a pretty fucking bold "big lie", trying to deny the obvious to our faces. <br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>DE goes on to claim peak oilers think there is no time to act and no hope of preventing it - bullshit again, as the dozens of elists and discussion forums on oil depletion prove, as they've all got very active discussions on lobbying, political agenda's.....<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <br><br>Um...yeah, right. <br><br>I know you think I'm not up to your standards, but I could start pulling quotes from any of Heinberg's books, if you'd like, as a start. Then I'll slide on over to the popular movie End of Suburbia, or any of the dozens of websites like Dieoff.com...Oh, yeah, I got it, how 'bout 45 years of eliminationist ecofascist lit?<br><br>I'm on those same boards you are, and I go to those same type of meetings that you do, and I'm hearing a completely different take from the majority of that group.<br><br>So, <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>do you</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> have any idea about what the Columbo Accords were about? <p></p><i></i>
proldic
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

..

Postby wintler » Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:32 pm

Hi proldic, knew you'd show up eventually. Right when Dreams end bailed..<br><br>Heinberg says "we gotta do xyz (including democratic political reform) to AVOID collapse & dieoff", not "dieoff is inevitable, kill the poor" as dreams end has framed this thread. Don't think he's a member of ASPO either, incidentally. To hear him talking about oil, food and population: <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/lectures/446">www.globalpublicmedia.com/lectures/446</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>End of suburbia talks about peak oil but claims 'new urbanism' will solve the problem (uh huh, just like driving a prius will save the climate, s-u-r-e..) - no mention of dieoff OR killing the poor in there.<br><br>"dozens of websites like dieoff" - okay, knock yourself out: find me 3 links to oil depletion websites supporting 'Nazi style eugenics' (as dreams end puts it).<br><br>"45 years of eliminationist ecofascist lit" - whats that got to do with ASPO, barring more ad hominem/guilt by claimed association? <br><br>You're use of the ecofascist label is revealing, it's beloved of rightwing develop-and-be-damned/growth-is-good stooges.<br><br>"So, do you have any idea about what the Columbo Accords were about? " Presumably you'll get around to making your point about this eventually.<br><br><br>Incidentally, Stantons text, ASPO-Irelands decision to print it, and even the whole dieoff thesis, isn't entirely popular with peak oilers in general, see<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic9464.html">www.peakoil.com/fortopic9464.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic10470.html">www.peakoil.com/fortopic10470.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic10226.html">www.peakoil.com/fortopic10226.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br> <p></p><i></i>
wintler
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:28 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest